Welcome to the Lounge

The Lounge is rated PG. If you're about to post something you wouldn't want your
kid sister to read then don't post it. No flame wars, no abusive conduct, no programming
questions and please don't post ads.

We use Visual SourceSafe (yeah, I know, pipe down). Most of the dialogs in the application were created for Windows 3.1 dimensions , fixed in size, and a tremendous PITA to use. Even the dialogs in the 2005 'update' that were resizable started out way too small, especially with items that have more than 8 characters in the names.

A little judicious editing of the resources in the appropriate DLL using Visual Studio, and voilà! Dialogs with much bigger controls that are actually usable.

I suspect that it's because keeping the window a fixed size makes the interface a lot easier to code, as long as you don't care too much about usability. This seems to be a hallmark of developer-designed interfaces: who cares, deal with it, it's all there and it works doesn't it? (I'm not claiming to be innocent here).

You can see a stark difference in interfaces meant to be visible to consumers versus interfaces for tools and utilities used by admins and power users. You don't get a lot of the fancy we-care-about-UX goodies when it comes to programs made by and for techies, you're damn lucky it's not a command-line interface with no documentation (remember NT?)

It's disgusting. Sources have revealed that the raid on Cliff Richards house last week unearthed disgusting material. I have to warn you that you'll need a strong stomach when you find out what they have uncovered[^].

Oh thank you it wasn't naked pictures of Beiber, that would have ruined not only my supper but I don't think I could have recovered without mental counseling, not like she ain't got enough to deal with already.

Have you ever just looked at someone and knew the wheel was turning but the hamster was dead?
Trying to understand the behavior of some people is like trying to smell the color 9.

New album tracks from Cliff Richard? I don't believe that! That would be the first time in several decades...

Anything that is unrelated to elephants is irrelephantAnonymous----- The problem with quotes on the internet is that you can never tell if they're genuineWinston Churchill, 1944----- I'd just like a chance to prove that money can't make me happy.Me, all the time

I'm REALLY sorry if I have given you or anybody else that impression. But my kid sister has been madly in love with him for 30 years, so SHE might be disappointed.

Guess you can't choose your family, but you can unfollow them on Facebook at least...

Anything that is unrelated to elephants is irrelephantAnonymous----- The problem with quotes on the internet is that you can never tell if they're genuineWinston Churchill, 1944----- I'd just like a chance to prove that money can't make me happy.Me, all the time

I'm probably on the wrong website, but I've been wondering about this for the entire day now and no one could give me a satisfactory answer.
Is the following sentence correct? "I sat on the couch and was hungry."
Or should it be "I sat on the couch and I was hungry."
Or are both correct?
In the second sentence you could make two sentences by removing "and". In the first sentence this would leave the incomplete sentence "was hungry" (who was hungry?). I remember having something about this at school, but that's over ten years ago and I can't remember what it was.

I'm Dutch, but I somehow think this is an English thing too. In fact you can simply replace the words with their Dutch counterparts and you'd have the same (correct) sentence.

They are both correct. The difference being that the first one is just one sentence and the second one is a conjunction of two sentences. The only nitpicky thing to make the second one more proper would be to add a comma. Ergo...

I sat on the couch and was hungry.
I sat on the couch, and I was hungry.

Perhaps that is common/accepted usage in the US but when I went to school in London 376 years ago my English master, Mr Williams, as I recall, (a very stern chap who also took our Latin classes would, now and again, lob a book at you when you started to daydream about escaping) taught us not use commas before conjunctions.

However, just had a quick recce online and it appears that there is a lot of conflict over what is correct in this context.

I guess it boils down to what you were taught to do at school. Because of that teacher it just looks wrong to me to put a comma there.

I guess it boils down to what you were taught to do at school. Because of that teacher it just looks wrong to me to put a comma there.

Oh I get it. To me using a comma for a decimal point looks odd. Way back in the day seeing something like £100 looked weird too when I'm all about $100, but I'm used to it now. Of course none of this is as bad imperial versus metric conversions. I mean having a unanimous system would just be crazy talk.